IFly85

PHL-GSP this afternoon and we only had 8 passengers...

skid

18 people one of them a nonrev. 18 bags. 8000+ lb burn msp to slc.

BURflyer

At least you're flying...

saab2000

It is correct that there is no S/E taxi procedure at AWAC. But the company has done a lot of research into this and found that there is virtually no savings. I would probably concur based on anecdotal evidence.

The other day in LGA we had a very long taxi. While sitting basically stationary I shut down one engine. Every time the line crept forward I moved too. It took an awful lot of thrust just to break away from the spot and I had to maintain that higher thrust to keep moving.

When I restarted the left engine, it took virtually no thrust lever advancement to get the airplane moving.

There are likely times when a S/E taxi would help. But our company is not dumb and has actually researched this particular issue and found the savings to be minute, if they exist at all.

One big saver we do is to maintain flex thrust to 10000 feet out of most airports. Another is that we don't use reverse thrust on most runways. We crack the reversers, but don't pull them all the way. Of course, on short runways we use them and whenever the crew feels it prudent. But landing on one of the long runways in CLT there's no need. And it saves fuel and wear and tear on the motors.

The company does consider these things. Additionally, APU usage is being tracked in an attempt to save fuel.

But back to the original theme, there is no doubt that the savings would be far greater if they didn't run dumb flights.

The other day during a regular day we had 13 from SDF-LGA and then 23 from LGA-RDU. On a normal day. With at least one LGA-RDU flight later in the day.

If they really want to save gas, they need to re-think their route structures and some frequency of routes may have to go.

__________________
I am CRJ captain. Hear me roar.

whiskey72

It's called Fee for Departure. They don't care if they fly empty for the fact that they, AWAC, still get paid. When flights cancel it comes from powers higher than those in ATW dispatch. But if USAirways wants the flight run, you better bet we'll run it.

SAABaroowski

AWAC didnt cancel, becuase they are a "FEE FOR DEPARTURE" airline

The Chow

CVG-TPA-CVG

70/76 each way

__________________
The Chow

flyguyniner11

yeah lga yesterday was empty; talking to the gate agents a ton of flights went out near empty

CRJ1000

SLC - DEN 85% Full...3 DH crews (9 crew members).
DEN - CVG 95% Full
CVG - DEN 25% Full...1 DH crew (4 crew + 1 Cargo JS)

Saw about 20 COMAIR CRJ's parked. At least they were not wasting fuel!
Hope u all had a great 4th!

On a side note: talked to 2 jet pilots who will not have a job by the end of the summer
With all the airline pilot cut backs perhaps now would be the time to push the FAA for better crew rest requirements. Perhaps it would save a few pilots from the street!
I think a 12 hour duty day up to 14 for operational changes would be good...with 9 hours minimum rest. Any thought?

cbire880

Its called scheduled air service. You can't go around cancelling flights on a whim for low loads. If the flight is consistently light, you can remove it down the road. It would really suck to get to the airport for your trip only to find that they are going to get you there 5 hours later due to not enough passengers. I'd call that a violation of your ticket.